Commentary: Special Issue of the Journal of Forestry -- Tribal Forest

Home , Journal of Forestry

A Special Issue of the Journal of Forestry— In other cases, BIA Forestry provides the majority of staff and funding for forestry operations. Other tribes are some- Tribal Forest Management: Innovations for where in the middle with a mix of BIA Forestry and tribal Sustainable Forest Management employees and resources. BIA Forestry is the US govern- ment agency responsible for the federal trust responsibility to sustainably and productively manage tribal forests (US Michael J. Dockry and Serra J. Hoagland Congress 1994) whereas other federal land management agencies have trust responsibilities and treaty obligations on lands they manage. These relationships have sometimes ative American forests and tribal forest management led to differences in perspectives among tribes, BIA For- practices have sustained indigenous communities, N estry, and other federal agencies as to what is sustainable economies, and resources for millennia. These systems and what is the best productive use. The papers in this provide a wealth of knowledge and successful applications special issue are written with this as a backdrop. of long-term environmental stewardship and integrated, sustainable forest management. Tribal forestry has re- Readers of the Journal of Forestry will appreciate this ceived an increasing amount of attention from forest man- special issue for several reasons. First, there is an increasing agers, academics, and tribal communities in recent years. desire to manage forests at a landscape scale. This necessi- Tribal forestry is seen as a way to provide approaches for tates working with multiple land management entities in- solving our most complex social, economic, and environ- cluding American Indian tribes. There are 567 federally mental issues facing natural resource managers today. It is recognized tribes in the United States (Bureau of Indian also considered as an important approach to build land- Affairs 2017) and more than 300 tribes manage more than scape-level partnerships and leverage funding for land- 18 million acres of forestland (Gordon et al. 2013). There scape-scale management. Tribal forest management pro- are also nearly 4,000 miles of shared boarders with US vides numerous examples of balancing complex, multiple Forest Service lands alone (US Forest Service 2014). In objectives in an era of shrinking budgets, novel ecologic addition, federal land managers have legal requirements to interactions, and increasing human demands on our natu- consult with tribes in their management. ral resources. This special issue of the Journal of Forestry We received an incredible response from foresters and seeks to capture a broad range of forest management prac- academics across the country to our call for papers and tices occurring in Indian Country and beyond; to increase received several dozen submissions, of which 24 were ac- general recognition of the role that tribal forest plays in the cepted and compiled into this special issue. Although it is greater landscape; and to engage broad audiences regarding not possible to have articles on every project, innovation, the value of tribal forests and how they can serve as models and aspect of tribal forest management, we believe that this for sustainability, integrated management, resilience, and special issue provides a range of papers that will be useful restoration. for foresters, land managers, and individuals interested in Tribal forest and natural resource management is tribal natural resource management. We grouped papers multifaceted. Forests are managed for timber production into subsections, but given the holistic perspective of tribal that supplies tribal and nontribal sawmills. Forests are forestry programs, we recognize that there is great overlap managed for spiritual and cultural values, but they are also among each article’s themes, ideas, and research. Subsec- managed using cutting-edge and novel management tech- tions include tribal forests and management, silviculture niques. Tribal forests are managed to maintain diversity of and forest management techniques, collaboration and species, respect culturally important landscapes, mitigate partnership, cultural keystone species management, and the negative effects of wildland ﬁre, and protect water re- education. sources. Tribal forest management is developing innovative Every tribe is unique, has a different history, holds solutions to shared land management problems such as ﬁre multiple levels of cultural perspectives, and is internally risks, invasive species, and models for sustainable forest diverse. Tribes also vary in how their forests are managed; management. Articles by Corrao and Andringa, Lake and in some cases, tribes manage their forests with minimal colleagues, Morishima and Mason, Motanic, and Sessions involvement from the Bureau of Indian Affairs Division of and colleagues each highlight that tribal forests, tribal for- Forestry and Wildland Fire Management (BIA Forestry). est management, and tribal perspectives can serve as exam-

Received April 7, 2017; accepted April 14, 2017; published online May 25, 2017. Afﬁliations: Michael J. Dockry ([email protected]), US Forest Service, Northern Research Station, 1992 Folwell Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108. Serra J. Hoagland ([email protected]), US Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Missoula, MT.

Journal of Forestry • MONTH 2017 1 ples of the sustainable forest management Apache Nation and the US Forest Service, and legal meanings, but they are emphasized needed to solve our myriad problems. Mau- Jurney and colleagues’ article describes part- to lesser extent in this issue. sel and colleagues describe the legacy and nerships between tribes and the National We hope that this special issue raises future of our nation’s first sustained yield Forests of Arkansas and Oklahoma, Lu- awareness of the range of forest management forest on the Menominee Nation’s reserva- cero and Tamez discuss collaboration and happening in tribal forestry today. By broad- tion, and Sasatani and colleagues outline the the implementation of the 2004 Tribal ening perspectives, understanding, and knowl- perceived value of voluntary certification pro- Forest Protection Act, and finally, Alexan- edge of tribal forest management, we hope grams for Native American forest products. der and colleagues’ article discusses how that this special issue lays the groundwork Specific examples of silviculture tech- working across cultures in California has for future collaboration, partnerships, and niques, timber stand improvement, and supported invasive species management for improved forest management on tribal and other management tools form the second natural and cultural resources. These articles nontribal lands alike. The authors are section of this special issue to give foresters illustrate that partnerships for natural re- thankful for the stewardship that tribes practical examples and ideas. Hoyt and col- source management are important for the have engaged in over millennia. They are leagues look at southwestern dwarf mistletoe future and give us models to emulate while also thankful to their tribal partners and impacts on Ponderosa pine, Singleton and highlighting pitfalls to avoid. the Journal of Forestry editors and staff Oblinger discuss western white pine and The final subsection is on education, who helped compile this important collec- blister rust pruning, Bardon and colleagues and here several articles explicitly describe tion of papers. Funding for this special is- test ways to improve red elm germination, education as a way to engage tribal youth, sue was provided through a partnership Dey and colleagues describe the yield poten- enhance natural resource management, and between the US Forest Service and the So- tial and value of high-quality sugar maple, develop a cadre of future natural resource ciety of American Foresters. Vales and colleagues describe a nutrition- managers. A tribal youth mentorship pro- based approach for managing elk habitat, gram in Maine that has successfully increased Literature Cited and Kern and colleagues describe research university enrollment is described by carr and BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS. 2017. Notice: Indian into gap sizes and outcomes for managing collagues. Hoagland and colleagues show how entities recognized and eligible to receive ser- northern hardwood forests. tribal lands can be used to enhance university vices from the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs. In Federal Register, Vol. 82, No. 10. The third subsection includes papers education for all students. Finally, Gervais and January 17, 2017. Available online at https:// focused on the management of cultural key- colleagues describe Native American student www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2017-01-17/html/ stone species. This is exemplified in Long perspectives of natural resources in higher ed- 2017-00915.htm. and Goode’s “Picture the Past” discussion ucation and provide recommendations for im- GORDON, J., J. SESSIONS,J.BAILEY,D.CLEAVES, that illustrates the cultural continuity of proving Native American student retention V. CORRAO,A.LEIGHTON,L.MASON,M.RAS- black oak acorn collection and management. and university practices for Indian students. MUSSEN,H.SALWASSER, AND M. STERNER. 2013. Assessment of indian forests and forest Long and colleagues’ article on black oak To further aid readers, it is helpful to management in the United States final report— restoration shows the cultural importance of discuss terms used in this special issue. First, The Third Indian Forest Management Assess- ecological restoration for tribal communities individual authors used their own terms ment Team for the Intertribal Timber Council, in California. Costanza and colleagues re- throughout this special issue; however, in R. White (ed). Intertribal Timber Council, view black ash ecology, silvics, and manage- general, Native American, Indian, tribe, Portland, OR. Available online at http:// ment and its heightened importance to tribal, and indigenous are the most inclusive www.itcnet.org/issues_projects/issues_2/ forest_management/assessment.html. tribal communities because of threats from terms and typically refer broadly to the orig- US CONGRESS. 1994. National Indian Forest invasive species. inal inhabitants of these lands. This can in- Management Act, Title 25, Chapter 33, Sec- Several articles describe how collabora- clude people from federally recognized tribes, tion 3101–3120. Available online at http:// tive partnerships are critical to achieving state-recognized tribes, or tribal descen- uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?pathϭ/ ϭ both tribal and federal land management as dants. American Indian is often more spe- prelim@title25/chapter33&edition prelim. exemplified in Hatcher and colleagues’ arti- cific and is typically used to indicate feder- US FOREST SERVICE. 2014. Tribal connections in- teractive map: Shared borders layer. Available cle on the Klamath Tribes and US Forest ally recognized tribes or individuals of online at https://apps.fs.usda.gov/arcx/rest/ Service partnership, Hays’ article discusses a federally recognized tribes. Alaska Native services/wo_nfs_gstc/GSTC_FSIndianLands unique collaboration between the Mescalero and Pacific Islander also have specific federal SharedBorders_01/MapServer.

2 Journal of Forestry • MONTH 2017